It’s the last day before summer officially begins. Let’s get reacquainted.

by Colin McGuire. 0 Comments

OK. So … it’s been a while, hasn’t it? The upfronts happened. The Mad Men Project has taken up this space at least once a week for the past 13 weeks. And, of course, the beginning of another month occurred and another installment of Netflix Pix happened. These things have ultimately led to this blog enduring a deluge of posts regarding television without the word “Internet” in front of it.

It is with this in mind, then, that we offer the following quick look at a few of the stories that slipped through the cracks in the last month or so. Consider the words below an olive branch aimed at catching us all up with the wide world of Web TV. Or, if you don’t enjoy olive branches, consider this a cheap and pathetic attempt at getting back to the bread and butter of what it is to live a TV Without A TV lifestyle. And if you don’t enjoy cheap and pathetic attempts at things, then … well … I don’t know what to tell you.

In any case, it’s time for a bit of a catch-all, now. It’s all out of love, remember. Love.

Can you take me higher?

Such were the epic (boy, I hate that word) lyrics from one of the legendary (that was sarcastic) Creed’s most famous singles. But after Tuesday’s news that the Justice Department is looking into the notion that cable companies possibly colluded to restrict competition from Web video providers, that phrase may be uttered by some Internet companies when it comes to distributing their monthly bills. From The Columbus Dispatch …

“In light of the Justice Department’s investigation, cable companies might look for other ways to maintain their revenue and market share,” the paper’s Quentin Fottrell wrote. “One option: Do what cellular networks are doing and move toward usage-based pricing for broadband Internet service, said Craig Moffett, senior analyst at Bernstein Research. The shift to usage-based pricing would be good for the cable operators but bad for consumers who want to watch more on-demand television online, he said. Broadcast and cable TV networks also have no interest in lower prices, experts said.”

Thus the following questions should be asked: After seeing how much of a hit Netflix took when it decided to raise its prices not all that long ago, how much patience would Internet TV users have if the prices for these services begin to balloon? Isn’t one of the most prominent reasons for going cable-less the amount of money you can save by doing so? If that becomes compromised, why even deal with Internet connections being slow or unreliable and simply go back to a regular, traditional cable television package?

Silly Justice Department. Don’t you have athletes to bother?

Fool me once, shame on you. Full me a second time …

Oh, Google TV. You try and dress yourself up so well, and even make us occasionally lust after you, sometimes all but forcing us to consider asking you out on a date. But then, as it turns out, you chew with your mouth open and we just can’t take our eyes off that one chipped tooth whenever we speak to each other. Wait. What’s that? You say you were thinking about going to the dentist? From TG Daily …

“Google TV has matured a bit, and Sony is willing to give it a second chance. This time, though, it’s playing it safe and going for a high-margin, low-cost set-top box device,” the site’s Raven Lovecraft wrote Tuesday. “The Sony NSZ-GS7 has just gone up for pre-order at J&R Electronics stores, with a price of $199. The box will allow users to gain access to TV-based Web browsing, apps like Netflix and Youtube (but not yet Hulu Plus), and a bunch of Android apps designed specifically for the TV interface.”

The item goes on to explain how interesting and neat the box’s remote control looks, suggesting that maybe leveling off the rest of that tooth in favor of a new — yet fake — pearly white would finally allow us to fall in love once and for all. But then again, less we forget: Lipstick. Pig. Yada, yada.

CNBC, meet Yahoo. Yahoo, meet “Squawk Box.”

Rest easy, rich, obnoxious people: Your go-to (read: only) source for numbers on television has officially gotten in bed with an Internet search engine company! From Bloomberg …

“Yahoo! Inc., the largest U.S. Web portal, and CNBC said they reached an agreement to offer finance news to television subscribers and Internet users as the companies aim to increase advertising sales,”Mark Lee wrote last Wednesday“… The agreement will allow CNBC and Yahoo to offer news content to more than 40 million online users in the U.S., the companies said. Television content from the Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey-based CNBC is distributed to almost 100 million households in the U.S., according to the statement.”

One small step for Internet television. One giant leap for fast-talking, well-dressed pretty faces who could buy me 500 times over.

One out of every five of you use Internet television. Wait. There are five people who read this thing?!

These are fun. The Los Angeles Times‘ Dawn C. Chmielewski profiled a national study conducted by Frank N. Magid Associates last week. And this is what was found …

“The research found that 21% of consumers in the U.S. connect their TVs to the Internet — up from 16% a year earlier. That number is likely to rise, with 30% of consumers who haven’t already connected expressing an interest in doing so, Magid found in its nationally representative survey of 2,540 people,”she wrote on Wednesday. “… Game consoles led the transition, as gamers used their Xbox 360, Sony PlayStation or Nintendo Wii systems to browse the Web, watch movies and TV shows through subscription services such as Netflix, play games against online opponents or check their Facebook accounts. Such behavior is quickly moving beyond the technologically adventurous to everyday consumers. The number of connected TVs in homes could jump 50% annually over the next couple of years, Magid predicts.”

… Well, that is if the prices don’t blow through the roof, remember.


Leave a Reply